February 24, 2026
By Mirriam-Grace MacIntyre, Senior Partner, Global Risk Management
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the President to impose tariffs, bringing a sudden end to a large share of tariffs that had been imposed on almost every US trading partner. The President’s response was swift – by night’s end he signed a proclamation imposing a temporary 10 percent global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, set to go into effect next week. On Saturday morning, he announced on social media that he would further raise it to the maximum 15 percent level for the allowable 150-day period.
Without the current IEEPA tariffs, the effective tariff rate for consumers was expected to fall from 16.9 percent to 9.1 percent following the Supreme Court’s decision, according to Yale’s Budget Lab. However, according to their estimates, the addition of the President’s proposed 15 percent global tariff would raise the effective tariff rate to 13.7 percent, within striking distance of the pre-ruling rate.
In addition to the temporary 10 percent global tariff, which allows for an import surcharge of up to 15 percent for 150 days (about 5 months) without Congressional approval, the President has signaled he will initiate Section 301 unfair trade practices investigations, with further details to emerge in coming days. Taken together, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent estimates that by using new Section 122 and enhanced Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs issued under other statutory authorities “will result in virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026.”
These tariff swings are not over, and volatility will continue. While some relief may have been initially felt with the announcement of the Supreme Court decision, the introduction of Section 122 tariffs will likely eat into that initial sentiment. Industries will continue to feel the effects as tariffs remain in place for steel, aluminum, copper, and electronics and the initiation of new Section 301 investigations could result in additional duties and weaken or complicate newly negotiated trade deals. The European Union, for its part, froze ratification of its trade deal with the United States, awaiting clarity on the Administration’s approach.
This complicated trade environment will continue to affect small and large companies alike. The time for planning is now. Boards and CEOs have a responsibility to create multi-scenario models to evaluate how these shifts in trade policies will affect their supply chains and pricing, distribution timelines, and profit margins. The Supreme Court decision sidestepped the issue of tariff refunds; however, as these arguments proceed to lower courts, corporate leaders must assess tariff refund timing and opportunities, which are likely to be complicated and phased, and the potential political cost of doing so. Establishing a risk committee, integrating trade and geopolitical risk into business strategies and capital allocation, and planning for the various scenarios are the best way for companies to chart a course in these turbulent waters.
Mirriam-Grace MacIntyre is the Senior Partner for Global Geopolitical Risk Management at growth[period], where she advises clients on business market expansion and global risk management strategies. Ms. MacIntyre is a distinguished national security leader with over two decades of experience in intelligence, counterintelligence, and global security operations. She previously served as Executive Director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, where she led the U.S. government’s top counterintelligence and security programs, and also served as the Director for Counterintelligence at the White House National Security Council.
